What is ideal size monitor for competitive FPS gaming?

compboyo · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:20

I have a 40 inch at 1080p HDTV and 22 inch 1600x1050 monitor.

I prefer the 40 inch. But I think perhaps gaming on smaller screen gives more advantage?

In terms you can see whole screen without movign eyes. However on larger screen distant enemies are larger and easier to spot!

I was thinking buying 24 inch 1080p for my desk. Maybe this will be perfect or 22 inch is better?

FOr fun I game my PC hooked up to 40 inch but for online gmaing perhaps 22 or 24 would be better?

Whats your thoughts?

andy_mk3 · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:23

I have a 24" BenQ 1080p screen and I think it's just right for my needs. The same res on 40" is no-where near as sharp.

compboyo · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:28

andy_mk3 said:
I have a 24" BenQ 1080p screen and I think it's just right for my needs. The same res on 40" is no-where near as sharp.

lol I want to buy a Benq 24 inch ..its prob same one its:

BenQ G2420HD

andy_mk3 · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:30

I have the G2420HDBL which is LED backlit

compboyo · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:34

andy_mk3 said:
I have the G2420HDBL which is LED backlit

thats 5ms though and the other version is 2ms RT.

What does LED backlight do?

which version is better?

LED + 5ms RT

or The non LED 2ms version?

andy_mk3 · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:42

You wont notice a single difference in the response time whatsoever.

LED uses half the amount of power (24w instead of 49w), contrast is usually better also.

compboyo · 8 Jun 2011 at 19:52

andy_mk3 said:
You wont notice a single difference in the response time whatsoever.

LED uses half the amount of power (24w instead of 49w), contrast is usually better also.

really? the eye cant see difference between 5ms adn 2ms?

Well 2ms is sligghtl cheaper

But LEd has better image quality and uses less power so I should go for this one?

schnipps · 8 Jun 2011 at 20:01

30" and a very high FOV around 160-170 you can see quite a bit OR eye finity

PCM2 · 8 Jun 2011 at 20:22

compboyo said:
really? the eye cant see difference between 5ms adn 2ms?

Well 2ms is sligghtl cheaper

But LEd has better image quality and uses less power so I should go for this one?

I suggest you have a quick look through the massive thread on this forum dedicated to the differences and peoples experiences between these two monitors - http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18089775&highlight=g2420hd. In summary; the LED backlight is really just there to save power. The 2ms response time indicates the use of response time compensation technology to speed up grey to grey transitions - in this case BenQ's AMA or Advanced Motion Acceleration. There are very slight visible differences in the level of 'conventional trailing' (a 'smearing' of the same colour as the moving object) - in truth this isn't a difference between 5ms and 2ms at all it is the difference between certain transitions which are a bit faster on one monitor than the other but still rarely near the manufacturer's stated value. This is offset somewhat by the introduction of very slight 'negative ghosting' (often black) which manifests itself only on the HD and is related to the AMA. To be honest the overdrive is fairly 'weak' on the HD and therefore both monitors actually look quite similar in terms of trailing. The differences are likely only picked up by people who are told what to look for or are quite sensitive to trailing - in some cases the HD would appear slightly more responsive and in others the HDBL slightly would appear more responsive. This is explained more thoroughly in this review of a stated 5ms but otherwise rather responsive monitor, the BX2440.